- The mind is empty nature- The objects received (by mind) are of empty nature- The objects reflected (by mind) are of empty nature.- Outside this mind is also mindless matter.

But the objects are also solid if one touches a stone.

- Is it right that objects are as well mental as solid?- Where are they solid and where only mind?- Can objects be solid as well or only mind?

I also take in concideration that the son of the Buddha shakyamuni did enumerate that which exists as matter.It seems to be for this philosophy that matter does exist, but in how far is this related to mind?

In Dzogchen everything seems to be of mind only quality without object or subjest but objects like the sun is still shining. So the material universe or matter, like Rahula did mentioned and explained has somehow a structure without mind but that structure is once created by mind at a certain point.

There is a lot to say about this. First though you might want to rethink the split between animate and inanimate. Especially as you are inspired by the Dzogchen teachings.

The Blessed One said:

"What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." Sabba Sutta.

kalden yungdrung wrote:In a dream is it not possible to touch a stone who is lying on the field.

It's possible to touch objects in the dream state. Doing so, it's possible to investigate just how realistic the tactual sensations are, i.e. how they correspond to similar waking state experiences. The degree of correspondence can be quite remarkable.

kalden yungdrung wrote:In a dream is it not possible to touch a stone who is lying on the field.

It's possible to touch objects in the dream state. Doing so, it's possible to investigate just how realistic the tactual sensations are, i.e. how they correspond to similar waking state experiences. The degree of correspondence can be quite remarkable.

Tashi delek,

Thanks for the reply.

As far as i did understood are the dreamstates a reflection of the dayly moods. To recognize this would mean that everything would be of empty nature. That do i conclude with the help of the actual conciousness, which is no other conciousness then in the dream state. But the very essence is here emptiness which is again better understood in the waking state, of the Dzogchen practice.

At night the Dzogchenpa tries to unify the Natural State with dreams. That is here another approach.....

When we touch something is this sensation not also Emptiness and therefore illusory?

"But if you know how to observe yourself, you will discover your real nature, the primordial state, the state of Guruyoga, and then all will become clear because you will have discovered everything"-Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche

Fa Dao wrote:When we touch something is this sensation not also Emptiness and therefore illusory?

I guess matter has no mind but is part of Nature, out of which all does originate, stays for a while and returns back.Here space is like endless emptiness so there is a interreleated aspect here between matter and mind.

illusory for mind in so far the mind does grasp at the visionary aspect. And here, i guess the object can be, attached / attachment to a stone (diamond?).

Grasping is a wellkown factor in Buddhism as well outside.

Mutsug MarroKY

THOUGH A MAN BE LEARNEDIF HE DOES NOT APPLY HIS KNOWLEDGEHE RESEMBLES THE BLIND MANWHO WITH A LAMP IN THE HAND CANNOT SEE THE ROAD

"What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." Sabba Sutta.

"What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." Sabba Sutta.

Andrew108 wrote:I mean right now. What are the five elements right now.

Tashi delek,

Right now they are in the body present with all illusion because my body is like that. So what is what depends on the sitiuation of awarenes.....

In Dzogchen practice this experience of awareness is different right now if you like it. And yes i see it more in the Dzogchen realated sense that those elements are experienced quite different than elswhere.

So how do i see it? Well as self emanating what should i say else (left overs from practice), it is like that also at this very moment and before etc.

Mutsug marroKY

THOUGH A MAN BE LEARNEDIF HE DOES NOT APPLY HIS KNOWLEDGEHE RESEMBLES THE BLIND MANWHO WITH A LAMP IN THE HAND CANNOT SEE THE ROAD

kalden yungdrung wrote:As far as i did understood are the dreamstates a reflection of the dayly moods. To recognize this would mean that everything would be of empty nature. That do i conclude with the help of the actual conciousness, which is no other conciousness then in the dream state.

There is a significant difference between inference and direct perception. Inference only takes one so far...

kalden yungdrung wrote:But the very essence is here emptiness which is again better understood in the waking state, of the Dzogchen practice.

It would be best understood in all states. Hence the inclusion of six dzogrim practices in some terma cycles.

......In Dzogchen everything seems to be of mind only quality without object or subjest but objects like the sun is still shining. So the material universe or matter, like Rahula did mentioned and explained has somehow a structure without mind but that structure is once created by mind at a certain point.

Thanks in advance for your efforts to make it more clear

Mutsug MarroKY

Both mind and objects are empty by nature. Objects are merely misconceptions, nothing more than empty projections which seemingly originate via imputation yet are in truth unfounded. Primordial wisdom mistakenly perceives it's own display as a fragmented subject-object dichotomy and due this failure to recognize itself an illusory substratum is formed which becomes the basis for the afflicted personal consciousness. This polluted basis (all-ground) is the ignorance which maintains samsaric perception. Though it may appear to, in truth nothing is received or reflected, what appears to be sensory phenomena is merely the minds own luminous display. When this is recognized it becomes wisdom. Ultimately all appearances are unsubstantiated and illusory. There's no outside or inside. No mind and no matter, all of these designations are imputed misnomers and though they may appear to be real when one is deluded, they are completely illusory.

In dzogchen what appears to be a universe etc is the empty display of primordial wisdom, when this isn't recognized and samsara arises wisdom is seemingly obscured resulting in deluded dualistic mind which erroneously perceives a world and matter and all of it. In truth (when one isn't beguiled by afflicted perception) all that appears is the nature of mind (which is the union of empty cognizance and luminous clarity). I'm sure you've heard the analogy of the moon reflected in water, phenomena appear in that way; likened to looking at the surface of a lake and mistaking the reflection of the moon for an actual object, when in truth it is nothing more than water. In experience one mistakes the display of wisdom to be internal/external phenomena and objects (plus other co-emergent qualities such as time, space, location, emotions, sensations, perceptions etc...) when in fact it's simply primordial wisdom.

So it appears as if there is a sun in the sky which exists outside of you as an individual, and it's a completely compelling appearance, it seems truly real. In truth however it is an illusion. Materiality, physicality, matter etc.. appear to exist due to our ignorance, yet they are empty designations which are solely an expression of ignorance.

I'm not sure about Buddha Shakyamuni's son saying that matter was real, I can't see that being that Buddha Shakyamuni certainly didn't teach that view, but I could be wrong.

"Phenomena are the delusion of mind;Apart from mind there are no phenomena.The deluded mind appearing as phenomenais dependently originated, illusory, and uncreated."- An early Semde text titled Tawai Gumchung

Very interesting and correct seen like in Dzogchen or how Dzogchen can deal with this matter / objects.That is no doubt about it, it is the best interpretation.

But in case we see the gradual approach here or the emancipation(s), a certain knowledge is maintained like the outer objects are true. I agree fully what is true cannot be true for someone else, what is mediicine for someone else is poison for the other person etc.

So to make the matter understandable different kinds of philosophy is "invented".

Objects and attachment to them, the result is everywhere seen as NOT so ok.Objects in Bon Dzogchen or general Dzoghen are not there. Here we have the point which cannot be known to other Traditions. Not to speak about Thogal.........

But if we deal with illsusion it is at the moment very clear that when my mom is too long in the sun she will have a red painfull skin. So i must buy some oil (out of compassion) to get the pain lessened / reduced.

So to tell my mom that it is in fact illusion etc. that is of no use to her at that moment and also other moments.

Maybe it is and it is not like i did suggested in Jnana's post would be here the best position which is for everybody understandable. Here is not meant per se the defending of the ultimate truth contra the relative one.

So i came IMO to the conclusion that a stone and the sun do exist in this collective karma called human being and his/her/ its world. Exceptions cannot be defended by the other party to the nihilsts, they will never or seldom agree to for instance a Dzogchen view not to speak about a Yidam etc.

What i do prefer? Like mentioned earlier the Dzogchen View but cannot defend that to others mostly. Can be it among them, that is no problem but cannot argue with them about matter and ego and living after death.

So we do communicate mostly, seen in the mood of Dzogchenpas, in the common karma called human, but not conflicting our NS. So for others is that a confirmation of their view (like nihilistic view) somehow if one does not argue about the essential things in life............

Better stop here because i feel i am repeating or a wheel is turning.

Mutsug MarroKY

THOUGH A MAN BE LEARNEDIF HE DOES NOT APPLY HIS KNOWLEDGEHE RESEMBLES THE BLIND MANWHO WITH A LAMP IN THE HAND CANNOT SEE THE ROAD